organizational communication and burnout symptoms

Organizational Communication and Burnout Symptoms 1

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION AND BURNOUT SYMPTOMS

Organizational Communication and Burnout Symptoms

Claartje ter Hoeven and Menno de Jong

University of Twente

Bram Peper

Erasmus University

Claartje ter Hoeven and Menno de Jong, Department of Communication Studies,

Faculty of Behavioral Sciences, University of Twente; Bram Peper, Department of the Social

Sciences - Women's studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Claartje ter Hoeven,

Department of Communication Studies, Faculty of Behavioral Sciences, University of

Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands, E-mail:

[email protected]


2

Abstract

Job burnout is a psychological response to work demands. Many studies have been conducted

measuring burnout and its causes and consequences. Though research into the antecedents of

burnout has brought up various communication-related constructs, a comprehensive overview

of the role of organizational communication variables is still lacking. This study investigates

these relationships, not only social support but also the exchange of information, the

communication climate in an organization, and employees’ satisfaction with organizational

communication. Employees of a Dutch subsidiary of an international financial consultancy

firm were surveyed using a web-based questionnaire. The questionnaire included the

following clusters of independent variables: (a) personal characteristics, (b) job

characteristics, (c) organizational communication, and (d) engagement with the organization.

Of the four clusters of variables, engagement with the organization variables appeared to be

the strongest predictors of job burnout, but communication variables also made an important

contribution. Communication climate and communication satisfaction, in particular, appeared

to be important antecedents of job burnout.


3

Organizational Communication and Burnout Symptoms

The philosopher Achterhuis (1984) describes work as “a peculiar medicine”: it can

make you ill, and it can make you feel well; it can make you experience fulfillment (e.g.,

flow, Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), and it can leave you burned out (Schaufeli, 2003). The strong

emotions people may experience in the workplace have long been recognized. Seeking to

understand how people deal with these emotions, Maslach (1976) came across the

phenomenon of job burnout. To assess this state of mental exhaustion, Maslach (1981)

developed a measurement scale: the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI).

Maslach (1981) defines burnout as “a syndrome of emotional exhaustion and cynicism

that occurs frequently among individuals who do ‘people-work’ of some kind” (p.99). Though

job burnout was thought to be limited to human services, where professionals do “people-

work” (Maslach & Schaufeli, 1993), it has been acknowledged more recently that it affects

other occupational groups as well (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Leiter & Schaufeli, 1996;

Schutte, Toppinen, Kalimo, & Schaufeli, 2000).

The MBI conceptualizes burnout as a three-component syndrome: emotional

exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment. Emotional

exhaustion refers to a reduction of emotional resources. Emotionally exhausted employees

lack energy to give to their job. Depersonalization refers to a process in which employees

detach from their job and begin to develop indifferent attitudes towards the people they work

with. Reduced personal accomplishment, finally, refers to poor professional self-esteem.

The societal effect of work stress should not be underestimated. In the early nineties,

more than 50% of all absence due to sickness in the United States was estimated to be stress

related. The yearly costs for employers exceed 200 billion dollars, if absenteeism, reduced

productivity, medical expenses, and compensation claims are considered. In the EU, most

countries are estimated to spend about 10% of their GNP on stress-related problems

(Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998).


4

Since the development of the MBI, many studies have measured burnout and

investigated its causes and consequences (for reviews see Cordes & Dougherty, 1993;

Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004; Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001).

Taking into account “the fundamental premise that burnout is a consequence of the interaction

of an individual with a work setting” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 401), the assumption arises that

organizational communication may be an important antecedent of burnout. The available

research into the antecedents of burnout only focuses on a few communication-related

constructs, such as social support (Baruch-Feldman, Brondolo, Ben-Dayan & Schwartz,

2002), coworker support (Berlin Ray & Miller, 1994; Lee & Ashforth, 1996), and emotional

communication (Miller, 2003). A more comprehensive overview of the role of organizational

communication variables—not only considering social support but also the exchange of

information, the communication climate in an organization, and the employees’ satisfaction

with organizational communication—is still lacking.

This study explores the influence of communication variables on job burnout, in

combination with other, already recognized antecedents of burnout, such as employees’

personal characteristics, job characteristics, and engagement with the organization (e.g., job

satisfaction and organizational commitment).

Theoretical and Empirical Relationships

The purpose of the current study was to explore the relationship between

organizational communication and burnout symptoms, beyond the already recognized

antecedents. To do so, this study includes two perspectives on organizational communication:

a functional perspective, which refers to the exchange of information within the organization,

and an interpretative perspective, which refers to the employees’ subjective perceptions of the

interaction processes (e.g., Deetz, 2001; De Ridder, 2005). The functional perspective is

represented by information overload and underload, and the interpretive perspective is

represented by communication satisfaction, communication climate, and social support.


5

Figure 1 introduces the variables studied. Four clusters of independent variables were

used: (a) personal characteristics, (b) job characteristics, (c) organizational communication,

and (d) engagement with the organization. It is hypothesized that each cluster of variables will

contribute to the amount of variance explained of employees’ burnout symptoms.

-- PLEASE INSERT FIGURE 1 --

Personal Characteristics

A first cluster of variables involves the personal characteristics of employees,

including demographic variables (such as age and gender) but also more specific life events.

Earlier research has shown that some of these personal characteristics and life events may be

related to burnout symptoms, although “these relationships are not as great in size as those for

burnout and situational factors, which suggest that burnout is more of a social phenomenon

than an individual one” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 409).

In the 1980s, a study by Pines (1988) showed that women suffered higher levels of

burnout. Later findings concerning the relationship between gender and burnout, however,

appeared ambivalent (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993). Bekker, Croon, & Bressers (2005), for

instance, found that men experience more emotional exhaustion than women. Pretty,

McCarthy, and Catano (1992) studied the effect of job level and gender on burnout among

managerial and non-managerial employees. They found that men experienced more emotional

exhaustion and depersonalization as managers, whereas women experienced more exhaustion

in non–managerial positions.

Age is assumed to have an inverse relationship with burnout. Many studies have

shown that burnout is higher among younger employees (e.g., Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter,

1996). Young employees, who have relatively little work experience, seem to be more at risk.

These findings must be viewed with caution due to the possibility of selective dropout: it is


6

likely that the employees with the most burnout symptoms quit their jobs, leaving behind the

relatively healthy employees (Schabracq, 2003). Besides, age may be confounded with other

potentially relevant variables, such as position and status (Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter,

2001).

Employees who are married or cohabiting seem to experience fewer burnout

symptoms than those who are not. Single people experience even higher levels of burnout

than those who are divorced (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). According to Pines (1988),

employees who successfully combine work and family must maintain a balance between the

two, which may protect them from over involvement in either role: “When they feel they have

failed at one, the other gives meaning to their lives” (p.214). This may even be stronger when

children are involved (Otten, Smulders, & Andries, 2002).

Far-reaching life events, such as the birth of a child, marriage, a marital crisis, or

severe health problems, may also be related to burnout (Justice, Gold, & Klein, 1981). More

generally, Holmes and Rahe (1967) concluded that people who experienced many far-

reaching life events have a greater risk of suffering poor health.

Job Characteristics

In general, the relationship between job characteristics and burnout is assumed to be

stronger than the relationship between personal characteristics and burnout (Halbesleben &

Buckley, 2004; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). In a meta-analysis of the

burnout research, Lee and Ashforth (1996) found convincing evidence that workload and time

pressure both have a strong relationship with burnout. A similar, but weaker, effect can be

found between the number of working hours and burnout (Schabracq, Winnubst, & Cooper,

2003).

Autonomy is also considered an important variable in this cluster. According to Deci

and Ryan (1987, p. 1026), “autonomy connotes an inner endorsement of one’s actions, the

sense that they emanate from oneself and are one’s own.” Many studies have found a strong


7

negative relationship between autonomy and burnout (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Lee &

Ashforth, 1996; Schaufeli, 2003). Burnout symptoms occur less frequently when employees

are given some freedom in their work and are allowed to function autonomously.

The work and life barriers experienced by employees form another important variable.

In the past, the focus was on the negative influence of the work environment on burnout, but

recent research has begun to give the home environment its place. Peeters, Montgomery,

Bakker, & Schaufeli (2005) developed a Home Demands Scale, which can be used next to the

older scales that measure the effects of the work domain. Both job and home demands appear

to have a relationship with burnout. Incompatible home and job demands (barriers) may

enhance this effect. Job insecurity could increase this pressure on the job and home situation

even more.

Person-organization fit refers to the match between the employee’s values and those of

the organization. Maslach et al. (2001) describe burnout as being the result of one of six

mismatches between a person and their job, one of which they call value conflict. In this case,

the requirements of the job and/or the targets of the organization do not agree with personal

moral values. Cherniss (1980) calls this “incongruent institutional goals.” Siegall and

McDonald (2003) found that a mismatch between an individual’s values and those of the

organization may lead to higher burnout symptoms.

Organizational Communication

Studies about the relationship between organizational communication and burnout are

scarce. Based on the general notion that burnout may be a response to overload (Maslach et

al., 2001), it could be assumed that information overload is related to burnout. Research has

also shown that burnout may be related to a lack of feedback (Maslach & Schaufeli, 2001). As

lack of feedback is an aspect of organization information underload, this may also contribute

to burnout symptoms.


8

Employees’ subjective perceptions of the interaction processes within their

organization have not been studied in association with burnout. This presents two interesting

variables: communication satisfaction and communication climate. Communication

satisfaction refers to the overall degree of satisfaction employees express with the total

communication environment (Rubin, Palmgreen, & Sypher, 1994). Communication climate

refers to the psychological climate shared among employees based on the communicative

elements of a work environment (Smidts, Pruyn, & Van Riel, 2001). Since burnout is a

consequence of an individual’s interaction with a work setting, communication satisfaction

and communication climate could thus be related to it.

The role of social support in burnout has been studied extensively (for reviews see

Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004). Although Halbesleben and

Buckley (2004) point out some contradictions in the findings, overall a negative relationship

has been found between social support and burnout (e.g., Baruch-Feldman, Brondolo, Ben-

Dayan, & Schwartz, 2002; Berlin Ray & Miller, 1994; Berlin Ray & Miller, 1991; Pines,

Ben-Ari, Utasi, & Larson, 2002). In their review study, Lee and Ashforth (1996) found that

supervisor social support had slightly more influence than coworker social support.

Engagement With the Organization

The association of burnout with work attitudes and intentions, such as job satisfaction

and organizational commitment, is considerable. However, since nearly all studies have been

cross-sectional, no causal inferences can be made (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). Different

studies assume different causalities; some describe job satisfaction and commitment as

antecedents of burnout and others regard them as outcomes. Although the direction of the

relationship cannot be determined from these studies and both directions seem plausible, a

strong relationship is certain.

Job satisfaction is one of the most studied concomitants of burnout (Schaufeli &

Enzmann, 1998). Although there is some disagreement whether job satisfaction is a cause or


9

an effect of burnout, there is a strong relationship. According to Spector (1997), dissatisfied

employees are more likely to report high levels of burnout. The conceptual framework

proposed by Cordes and Dougherty (1993), on the other hand, treats job satisfaction more as

an effect. Berlin Ray and Miller (1991), and Pines and Keinan (2005) also considered reduced

job satisfaction to be a consequence of burnout.

There is some evidence that stress-related issues correlate significantly with

commitment, in particular affective commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997). In their meta-

analysis, Lee and Ashforth (1996) showed a negative association between emotional

exhaustion and organizational commitment. Hartman Ellis and Miller (1993) found low

commitment as a consequence of burnout. Maslach et al. (2001) also argued for the same

direction: Burnout leads to lower productivity and effectiveness at work, and is consequently

associated with a reduced commitment to the job or organization.

Trust in management is a broad view of the fairness and competence of the

organization’s management. Organizational characteristics may have a strong influence on

trust, especially when they go against employees’ basic ideas of fairness and equity (Maslach

et al., 2001). Although the relationship between trust in management and burnout has not

been studied extensively, it seems plausible that this variable may affect burnout (e.g., Cordes

& Doughery, 1993; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004).

Method

Procedure for Data Collection

Employees of a Dutch subsidiary of an international financial consultancy firm were

surveyed using a web-based questionnaire. The company is a typical post-industrial

knowledge company, and it is known for its concern for employees’ development and

satisfaction. Employee satisfaction is monitored worldwide every year, and more specific

issues are studied on a national level on an irregular basis. The questionnaire on which this

study is based formed part of the latter monitoring. Data were collected in September,


10

October and November 2005, and employees were informed about the online questionnaire

through several digital news letters.

Sample and Response Rate

Of a total 4220 employees, 954 completed the questionnaire (23% response rate). The

response group (N = 954) was quite representative of the total company population with

respect to gender (response group: 48% female vs. 52% male; company: 43% female vs. 57%

male). Regarding age, the response group seems to represent somewhat older employees than

the total company population (response group: � 29 years: 29%; 30–39 years: 35%; 40–49

years: 20%; � 50 years: 16%; company: � 29 years: 44%; 30–39 years: 33%; 40–49 years:

12%; � 50 years: 10%). Most employees had an academic (39%) or a higher vocational

education (30%); 30% of all participants had middle and lower vocational education. More

than one third of all employees (40%) had children living in their household, and a large

proportion of workers (72%) were married or cohabiting. Half of the participants had been

employed by the company for six years or longer; 40% had a managerial position.

Measures

The questionnaire included the following clusters of independent variables: (a)

personal characteristics, (b) job characteristics, (c) organizational communication, and (d)

engagement with the organization. Each cluster was covered by five or more variables. The

first cluster (personal characteristics) included gender, age, marital status, children, and life

events. Cluster two (job characteristics) covered working hours, workload, autonomy, work-

life barriers, job security, and person-organization fit. Cluster three (organizational

communication) contained six communication constructs: communication overload,

communication underload, communication satisfaction, communication climate, coworker

social support, and supervisor social support. The last cluster (engagement with the

organization) included four components of commitment, job satisfaction, and trust in

management.


11

The dependent variable in this study, burnout, was measured using the Dutch version

of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-NL; see Schaufeli & Van Dierendonck, 1994;

Schutte, Toppinen, Kalimo, & Schaufeli, 2000; Maslach, 1981). The items represent three

dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment.

Emotional exhaustion refers to a depletion of emotional resources, where employees lack the

energy to give to their job. Depersonalization is a process in which employees detach from

their job and begin to develop indifferent attitudes. Reduced personal accomplishment refers

to diminishing perceptions of ability on the job. Items on this 16 item scale were rated on a 5-

point scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always). A sample item for emotional exhaustion was, “I feel

emotionally drained from my work.” A depersonalization item was, “I feel I’m too detached

from my work, and an example of reduced personal accomplishment was, “I have

accomplished many worthwhile things in this job” (recoded). Scale reliability was high

(Cronbach’s � = .85).

Although burnout is a multidimensional syndrome, this does not imply that the overall

concept should be abandoned. On the contrary, conducting research and theorizing on the

overall concept of burnout may help to make the antecedents of burnout more visible (cf.

Brenninkmeijer & Van Yperen, 2003 for a decision tree for choosing between a

multidimensional and unidimensional approach of burnout). Because this is an exploratory

study aiming at the overall concept of burnout, it seems more suitable to treat burnout as a

single construct.

Life events were measured by an 11-item list of circumstances that can have a major

impact on someone’s life (e.g., the birth of a child, serious health problems, marriage, and the

death of loved ones). For each event, respondents could indicate if this had happened to them

in the last twelve months and if so, how strongly they had experienced this event (3-point

scale, ranging from 1 [not far-reaching] to 3 [very far-reaching]). To measure the event’s


12

effect on burnout, only those events were counted that the respondents indicated as having

had a significant impact.

Workload was measured using a 7-item scale derived from Karasek’s (1998) Job

Content Questionnaire (JCQ). A sample item was. “Do you have to work hard?” Four-point

scales were used, ranging from1 (always) to 4 (never). The scale was reliable (Cronbach’s � =

.78).

Perception of autonomy was measured with a 4-item scale (the Decision Authority

Scale; Karasek, 1998). The scale consisted of items such as “Are you allowed to make your

own plans?” and “Can you decide what the content of your tasks will be?” A 4-point scale

was used, ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (always). The scale was reliable (Cronbach’s � = .81).

Work-life barriers were measured with the question, “Which of the following do you

experience as hindering your work-life balance?” Six fixed answer alternatives were stated

and an open one. The fixed answer alternatives included the lack of possibility to work part-

time, and “company culture doesn’t allow flexible working hours.” The number of barriers

people experienced for their work-life balance was counted.

To measure job insecurity, four questions of the Job Content Questionnaire were used,

focusing on the labor market requirements for particular skills, which could limit future career

possibilities. A sample item was, “If you lose your job, could you find the same job without

moving?” A 5-point scale was used, ranging from 1 (very possible) to 5 (impossible). Scale

reliability was high (Cronbach’s � = .94).

The fit between people’s own values and those of the company was measured using

the sixteen-item Competing Values Framework scale (O’Neill & Quinn, 1993; Quinn &

Spreitzer, 1991). For each value respondents were asked to indicate how important they found

this for their own life (5-point scale), and to what extent they saw this value as something the

company reflects (5-point scale). The (mis)fit between these two appeared to be a reliable

scale (Cronbach’s � = .83).


13

Communication overload and underload were measured using the first part of the ICA

Communication Audit (Goldhaber & Rogers, 1979; Rubin, Palmgreen & Sypher, 1994). This

section of the ICA Communication Audit, “Receiving Information from Others,” has two

parts, one on how much information you in fact receive, and one part on how much

information you need to receive to perform well. A sample item was, “This is the amount of

information I (need to) receive on how I am being judged.” Five-point scales were used,

ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (very much). To measure overload, a separate variable was

created for respondents who received more information than they needed (information

received minus information needed; Cronbach’s � = .76). The same was done to measure

information underload (information needed minus information received; Cronbach’s � = .87)

Communication satisfaction was measured using a five-item scale. This scale focused

on the employees’ communication satisfaction on various organizational levels. A sample

item was, “How satisfied are you with the communication at your location?” Five-point scales

were used, ranging from 1 (strongly dissatisfied) to 5 (strongly satisfied). The scale appeared

to be reliable (Cronbach’s � =.72).

Communication climate was measured using the 15-item scale developed by Smidts et

al. (2001). The items represent three dimensions: trust and openness in communication,

participation in decision making, and employees’ feelings of being taken seriously. One

example of these 15-items is, “Other members pay serious attention to what I have to say in

this organization.” The items were rated on 5-point disagree-agree Likert-scales. Scale

reliability was high (Cronbach’s � =.83).

Coworker social support was measured using a 4-item scale based on Karasek’s

(1998) Job Content Questionnaire. A sample item was, “My colleagues help me to get the

work done.” The items were rated on five-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree). The scale was reliable (Cronbach’s � =.79).


14

Supervisor social support was measured using a 5-item scale based on the Job Content

Questionnaire. Sample items include, “My supervisor helps to get the job done,” and “My

supervisor pays attention to what I say.” Five-point Likert-scales were used, ranging from 1

(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Scale reliability was high (Cronbach’s � =.86).

Job satisfaction was measured using the 3-item scale developed by Weiss (1967), plus

two additional items. These items add the importance of salary and career to those about how

enjoyable and satisfactory the job is. A sample item is, “In general I don’t like this job”

(recoded). Five-point Likert-scales were used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree). The scale appeared to be reliable (Cronbach’s � =.76).

This study measured four components of commitment, three of them derived from

Meyer and Allen (1991, 1997). They noted that commitment reflects three broad themes:

reflecting an affective orientation toward the organization, recognition of costs associated

with leaving the organization, and a moral obligation to the organization. These components

are labeled as affective, continuance, and normative commitment, respectively. The fourth

component of commitment which was measured is career commitment (Carson & Bedeian,

1994).

Affective commitment was measured using a 6-item scale based on Meyer and Allen

(for a Dutch translation of the scale, see De Gilder, Van den Heuvel & Ellemers, 1997). An

example of these items is, “This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me.”

Five-point scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) were used. Scale

reliability was high (Cronbach’s � =.84).

Continuance commitment was measured using a 5-item scale based on Meyer and

Allen (1997). Sample items are, “Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I

wanted to leave my organization right now” and “I believe I have too few options to consider

leaving this organization.” Five-point Likert-scales were used, ranging from 1 (strongly

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The scale was reliable (Cronbach’s � = .78).


15

The normative commitment scale used in this study is based on Meyer and Allen’s

(1997) original version. An example of the five items is, “I was taught to believe in the value

of remaining loyal to one organization.” Five-point Likert-scales were used. The scale

appeared to be reliable (Cronbach’s � =.73).

Career commitment was measured using a 4-item scale based on the factors Carson

and Bedeian (1994) called Career Identity (p. 247). A sample item is, “My line of work is an

important part of who I am.” Five-point Likert-scales were used, ranging from 1 (strongly

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The scale was reliable (Cronbach’s � =.73).

To measure the extent to which employees trust their management, a nine-item scale

based on De Ridder (2004) was used. A sample item is, “In this firm the right people are in

management positions.” A 5-point scale was used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree). Again, the scale was reliable (Cronbach’s � = .84).

Results

Descriptive Results and Correlations

Tables 1 and 2 present the means, standard deviations, and reliability of the dependent

and independent variables. The mean of the burnout score (M = 2.22) was below the midpoint

of the five-point scale, which indicates a relatively low average score on burnout. In the past

year, respondents had, on average, experienced almost two significant life events. Work-life

barriers were experienced a little bit less (M = 1.31; seven answer alternatives). In general, the

employees felt some degree of autonomy (M = 2.74; four-point scale). Workload was

considered somewhat high (M = 2.40; four-point scale). On average, employees’ feeling of

job insecurity was below midpoint (M = 2.24; five-point scale), which means they feel

reasonably secure about their work situation. The (mis)fit between the company’s values and

the values of the employee turned out to be less than one on the four-point scale resulting

from the comparison of the organization values and the employee values (M = .61). Though a

few respondents experienced information underload, this was felt in a moderate way (M =


16

.47); information overload was experienced even less (M = .12). The mean of the

communication climate scale (M = 3.41) was above the midpoint (on a 5-point scale), which

indicates a relatively high average score on communication climate. Supervisor social support

was also considered relatively high (M = 3.57; five-point scale), and coworker social support

was ranked even higher (M = 3.83; five-point). On average, the employees were satisfied both

with the communication and their job (M = 3.67, M = 3.78, respectively; 5-point scale). The

employees’ affective commitment was somewhat above midpoint (M = 3.32). Continuance

commitment and normative commitment were rated somewhat below the midpoint (M = 2.80,

M = 2.88, respectively; 5-point scale). Employees feel relatively committed to their careers

(M = 3.37; 5-point scale), and on average trust their management (M = 3.51; 5-point scale).

Table 3 presents the scale inter-correlations of the dependent and independent

variables. Of the twenty-three independent variables, eighteen correlated significantly with

job burnout. Job satisfaction showed the strongest correlation with burnout (r = -.52, p <

.001). The second and third strongest correlations concerned communication satisfaction and

communication climate (r = -.45, p < .001 and r =-.43, p < .001, respectively). Gender,

marital status, workinghours-week, job insecurity, and normative commitment showed no

significant correlation.

--PLEASE INSERT TABLE 1, 2 AND 3 --


17

Organizational Determinants of Burnout

The hypothesized relationships between job burnout and the determinants used in this

study were tested using hierarchical regression analysis. Together, the determinants explained

a considerable proportion of the variance in job burnout (adjusted R² = .45, p < .001). Table 4

shows the results of the analysis.

Four models were included in the hierarchical regression analysis. The first model

considers only the cluster of personal characteristics; these explain a very small, although

significant proportion of the variance (R² = .02, p < .001). In the second model, the job

characteristics were added to the respondents’ personal characteristics. This resulted in a

small, but significant improvement in the proportion of variance explained (R² = .21, p <

.001). In the third model, the communication variables were added, again resulting in a

significant improvement in the proportion of variance explained (R²= .33, p < .001). The

fourth and final model incorporates engagement with the organization; all together, this

explains 45% of the variance (R² = .45, p < .001). Of the four clusters of variables, the

engagement with the organization variables appeared to be the strongest predictors of job

burnout, but communication variables also made an important contribution.

In the fourth model, 10 of the 23 variables did not contribute significantly to the

prediction of burnout: marital status, children, life events, working hours a week, autonomy,

person-organization fit, information overload, supervisor social support, normative

commitment, and trust in management.

The strongest predictor of job burnout is job satisfaction (reverse relationship). Higher

satisfaction on the job predicts fewer burnout symptoms among employees. Other strong

predictors are continuance commitment and work-life barriers. Of the communication

variables, the communication climate and communication satisfaction, in particular, appeared

to be important antecedents of job burnout. This also represents a reverse relationship: when


18

employees perceive the climate as positive and are satisfied with the communication in

general, fewer burnout symptoms will appear.

--- INSERT TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE ---

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to shed light on the relationship between organizational

communication and burnout. Variables from both the functional and the interpretative

perspective on communication were found to relate to burnout: information underload,

communication satisfaction, communication climate, and coworker social support. Two of the

six communication variables considered in this study did not show a relation with burnout:

supervisor social support and information overload. It is striking that supervisor support was

not associated with burnout, because most other research on support and burnout has found a

relationship between these. This may have to do with the organization of this company:

almost half of the employees are supervisors and may therefore be regarded as coworkers

rather than managers. Information overload was also not found to be associated with burnout.

Employees did not experience a lot of information overload, and when they did, it was not

associated with burnout symptoms.

In agreement with previous research, this study found that personal characteristics

have less impact on burnout than variables related to the job or the organization. This is

underlined by the influence of life events and work-life barriers on the appearance of burnout

symptoms. The barriers people experienced in their work-life balance related much more

strongly with burnout than far-reaching events encountered in their private lives.

For managers who want to translate these findings into practice: not every cluster

considered in this study is manageable. Cluster one (personal characteristics) is impossible to

influence, because it consists of demographic variables and peoples’ private choices. Cluster


19

two (job characteristics) and cluster three (organizational communication) are more

controllable. The job characteristic variables that need attention with regard to burnout are

workload, work-life barriers, and job insecurity. This would suggest that attention should be

paid to work-life balance policies. The third cluster (organizational communication) also

needs attention if an organization wants to reduce the burnout symptoms of their employees.

In particular, the interaction employees experience with their working environment seems to

be relevant to managing burnout. The fourth cluster (engagement with the organization)

appeared to include the strongest predictors of job burnout. Unfortunately, constructs such as

job satisfaction and organizational commitment are too general and vague to form the basis

for clear management decisions. Though the causal order is still unclear, earlier studies

indicate that organizational communication may also influence these constructs (see De

Ridder, 2004; Eisenberg, Monge, & Miller, 1983; Postmes, Tanis, & De Wit, 2001). This

makes the organizational communication variables even more significant.

This study has been a first attempt to systematically explore the relationship between a

comprehensive set of organizational communication variables and burnout symptoms. The

comparison of the impact of communication variables to already recognized antecedents of

burnout makes it possible to estimate their relative contribution. Of course, however, the

research design was exploratory and cross-sectional, and therefore has limitations which call

for follow-up research. First, the research design does not allow causal interpretations of the

relationships found. For many of the variables involved it is not possible to establish a proper

time-order. A longitudinal research design would be a solution to gain more insight in the

development of the variables over time, and their causes and consequences. Second, despite

the sizeable sample, the research only involved one organization in the Netherlands. As a

result, caution is needed regarding the generalization of the findings. It would be interesting to

replicate our study in different (types of) organizations and in an international context.


20

A generally acknowledged complication in burnout research is the “healthy workers

effect” (Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003). The weight of burnout is hard to measure, because it is

likely that employees who are burned-out are not available to participate in the research. The

remaining group is relatively healthy. In this study, however, the focus was not on the

percentage of employees with burnout, but on the explanatory power of organizational

communication variables on burnout symptoms among employees who are still active. These

are the employees who can still be influenced by management decisions regarding the

organization and their job. Furthermore, it seems reasonable to assume that the same factors

may have been of influence on the employees who were already diagnosed with burnout. It

would be interesting, however, to conduct a similar study among the latter group of

employees.


21

References

Achterhuis, H. (1984). Arbeid een eigenaardig medicijn [Work, a peculiar medicine].Baarn:

Ambo.

Baruch-Feldman, C., Brondolo, E., Ben-Dayan, D., & Schwartz, J. (2002). Sources of social

support and burnout, job satisfaction and productivity. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 7, 1, 84-93.

Bekker, M. H. J., Croon, M. A. & Bressers, B. (2005). Childcare involvement, job

characteristics, gender and work attitudes as predictors of emotional exhaustion and

sickness absence, Work & Stress, 19, 3, 221-237.

Berlin Ray, E., & Miller, K. I. (1991). The influence of communication structure and social

support on job stress and burnout. Management Communication Quarterly, 4, 4, 506-

527.

Berlin Ray, E., & Miller, K. I. (1994). Social support, home/work stress, and burnout: Who

can help? Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30, 3, 357-373.

Brenninkmeijer, V. & Van Yperen, N. (2003). How to conduct research on burnout:

Advantages and disadvantages of a unidimensional approach in burnout research.

Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 60, 1, 16-20.

Carson, K. D., & Bedeian, A. G. (1994). Career commitment: Construction of a measure and

examination of its psychometric properties. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 3, 237-

262.

Cherniss, C. (1980). Professional burnout in the human service organizations. New York:

Prager.

Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job

burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18, 4, 621-656.


22

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:

Harper & Row.

De Gilder, D., Van den Heuvel, H., & Ellemers, N. (1997). Het 3-componenten model van

commitment [The three component model of commitment]. Gedrag en Organisatie, 10,

95-105.

De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Organisational communication and supportive employees. Human

Resource Management Journal, 14, 3, 20-30.

De Ridder, J. A. (2005). Doelen van interne communicatie [goals of organizational

communication]. In Van Ruler, B., Elving, W., Van den Hooff, B., Smit, E., &

Verhoeven, P. (eds.), Communicatiemanagement: In communicatiewetenschappelijk

perspectief [Communication management: In communication science perspective.]

Amsterdam: Boom onderwijs.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 6, 1024.

Deetz, S. (2001). Conceptual foundations. In Jablin, F. M. & Putnam, L. L. (Eds.),

Organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods. Thousand

Oaks: Sage Publications.

Eisenberg, E. M., Monge, P. R., & Miller, K. I. (1983) Involvement in communication

networks as a predictor of organizational commitment. Human Communication

Research, 10, 1, 179

Goldhaber, G. M., & Rogers, D. P. (1979). Auditing organizational communication systems:

The ICA communication audit. Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.

Golembiewski, R. T., Munzenrider �� R. F., & Stevenson, J. G. (1986). Stress in organizations:

Toward a phase model of burnout. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of

Management, 30, 6, 859-879.


23

Hartman Ellis, B. & Miller, K. I. (1993). The role of assertiveness, personal control, and

participation in de prediction of nurse burnout. Journal of Applied Communication

Research, 21, 4, 327-343.

Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The social readjusting scale. Journal of Psychosomatic

Research, 11, 213-218

Justice, B., Gold, R. S., & Klein, J. P. (1981). Life events and burnout. Journal of Psychology,

108, 2, 219-226

Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., & Amick, B. (1998). The

job content questionaire (JCQ): An instrument for internationally comparative

assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 3, 4, 322-355.

Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E., (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the

three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 2, 123-133.

Leiter, M. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1996). Consistency of the burnout construct across

occupations. Anxiety, Stress and Coping: An International Journal, 9, 3, 229-244.

Maslach, C. (1976). Burned-out. Human Behavior, 5,9, 16-22.

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of

Occupational Behavior, 12, 2, 99-113.

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1986). MBI: Maslach Burnout Inventory. Manual research

edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory. Manual, 3rd

edn. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting psychologists press.

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of

Psychology, 52, 397-422.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.


24

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and

application. London: Sage.

Miller, K. I., Hartman Ellis, B., Zook, E. G., & Lyles, J. S. (1990). An integrated model of

communication, stress, and burnout in the workplace. Communication Research, 17, 3,

300-326

Miller, K. I. (2003). Organizational communication: Approaches and processes. Belmont:

Wadsworth.

O’Neill, R. M., & Quinn, R. E. (1993). Editor’s note: Applications of the competing values

framework. Human Resource Management, 32, 1, 1-7.

Otten, F., Smulders, P., & Andries, F. (2002). Arbeidsuitval door burnout [Dropout as a

consequence of burnout]. Economisch-statistische berichten, 87, 4341, 11-13

Peeters, M. C. W., Montgomery, A. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2005). Balancing

work and home: How job and home demands are related to burnout. International

Journal of Stress Management. 12, 1, 43-61.

Pines, A. (1988). Career burnout: causes and cures. New York: The Free Press

Pines, A. (1993). Burnout: An existential perspective. In Schaufeli, W.B., Maslach, C., &

Marek, T. (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research

(pp. 33-51). Washington: Taylor & Francis.

Pines, A. M., & Keinan, G. (2005). Stress and burnout: The significant difference. Personality

and Individual Difference, 39, 625-635

Pines, A. M., Ben-Ari, A., Utasi, A., & Larson, D. (2002). A cross-cultural investigation of

social support and burnout. European Psychologist, 7, 4, 256-264.

Postmes, T., Tanis, M., & De Wit, B. (2001). Communication and commitment in

organizations: A social identity approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 4,

3, 227-246


25

Pretty, G. M. H., McCarthy, M. E., & Catano, V. M. (1992). Psychological environments and

burnout: Gender considerations within the corporation. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 13, 701-711.

Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1991). The psychometrics of the competing values culture

instrument and an analysis of the impact of organizational culture on quality of life.

Research in Organizational Change and Development, 5, 115-142

Rubin, R. B., Palmgreen, P., & Sypher, H. (1994). Communication research measures. A

sourcebook. New York: Guilford.

Schabracq, M. J., Winnubst, J. A. M., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.) (2003). The Handbook of Work

and Health Psychology. Chichester: Wiley.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Buunk, B. P. (2003). Burnout: An Overview of 25 Years of Research and

Theorizing. In Schabracq, M. J., Winnubst, J. A. M., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). The

Handbook of Work and Health Psychology (pp. 383-425). Chichester: Wiley.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Van Dierendonck, D. (1994). Burnout, een begrip gemeten: De

Nederlandse versie van de Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-NL) [Burnout, a concept

measured: the Dutch version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-NL)]. Gedrag en

Gezondheid: Tijdschrift voor Psychologie en Gezondheid, 22, 4, 153-172.

Schaufeli, W. B. (2003). De Psychologie van Arbeid en Gezondheid [Psychology of Work

and Health]. In Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A., & De Jong, A. (Eds), De Psychologie van

Arbeid en Gezondheid (pp. 15-37). Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum.

Schutte N., Toppinen, S., Kalimo, R., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2000). The factorial validity of the

Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS) across occupational groups and

nations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 53-66.

Seltzer, J., & Numerof, R. E. (1988). Supervisory leadership and subordinate burnout.

Academy of Management Journal, 31, 2, 439-446.


26

Siegall, M., & McDonald, T. (2003). Person-organization value congruence, burnout and

diversion of resources. Personnel Review, 33, 3, 291-301

Smidts, A., Pruyn, A. T. H., & Van Riel, C. B. M. (2001). The impact of employee

communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification.

Academy of Management Journal, 5, 1051-1062.

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and consequences.

London: Sage publications.

Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation,

No. 22). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.


27

Figure 1. Four clusters of antecedents of job burnout

Job Burnout

Personal characteristics - gender - age - marital status - children - life events -

Engagement with the organization - job satisfaction - affective commitment - continuance commitment - normative commitment - career commitment - trust in management

Job characteristics - working hours - workload - autonomy - work/life barriers - job insecurity - person/organization fit

Organizational Communication - information overload - information underload - communication satisfaction - communication climate - co-worker social support - supervisor social support


28

Table 1

Descriptive Variables

Variables Sample characteristics

Gender 52% male ; 48% female

Age Mean: 37.2 years (SD=10.32)

Marital status 22% single; 72% married, cohabiting; 6% different

Children 54% childless; 40% children; 6% different

Working hours/week On average people work 3.35hrs. longer than stated in contract

(SD = 7.33)

Severe life events ¹ Mean: 1.7 (SD = 1.70)

Work/life barriers ² Mean: 1.3 (SD = 1.14)

¹ “change of coworkers” (31%) and “health issues” (24%) were mentioned most

² “long working hours culture” (52%) and “organizational culture not open for flexible

working hours” (35%) were mentioned most


29

Table 2

Mean, Standard Deviation, and Reliability

Variables Measurement # Items Cronbach’s � M SD

burnout 5-point scale 16 .85 2.22 .48

workload 4-point scale 7 .78 2.40 .50

autonomy 4-point scale 4 .81 2.74 .57

job insecurity 5-point scale 4 .94 2.24 1.04

person-organization fit¹ 5-point scale 16 .83 .61 .38

information overload² 5-point scale 13 .76 .12 .19

information underload³ 5-point scale 13 .87 .47 .45

communication

satisfaction 5-point scale 5 .72 3.67 .48

communication climate 5-point scale 15 .83 3.41 .42

coworker social

support 5-point scale 4 .79 3.83 .52

supervisor social

support 5-point scale 5 .86 3.57 .65

job satisfaction 5-point scale 5 .76 3.78 .56

affective commitment 5-point scale 6 .84 3.32 .59

continuance

commitment 5-point scale 5 .78 2.80 .78

normative commitment 5-point scale 5 .73 2.88 .60

career commitment 5-point scale 4 .73 3.37 .61

trust in management 5-point scale 9 .84 3.51 .52

¹ difference between personal values and organizational values ² information received minus information needed ³ information needed minus information received


30

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 3

Correlations Among all Variables

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

1 Burnout -

2 Gender -.01 -

3 Age -.08* -.08* -

4 Marital status -.06 -.08* -.01 -

5 Children -.08* -.09** .04 .57** -

6 Events in personal life .12** .09** -.19* .02 .03 -

7 Working hours - week .00 -.41** -.14** -.07* -.18** .00 -

8 Workload .18** -.05 -.02 -.04 -.01 .01 .12** -

9 Autonomy -.25** -.23** .23** .03 .07 -.17** .14** .13** -

10 Work - life barriers .34** -.11** -.26** .02 -.05 .17** .21** .37** -.15** -

11 Job insecurity .04 .01 .43** .00 -.01 -.06* -.10** -.10** .01 -.15** -

12 Person - organization fit -.25** .04 .04 .00 .01 -.07* -.04 -.19** .03 -.18** .02 -

13 Information overload .09** -.07* .09** -.02 .02 -.07* .06 -.03 .08* -.06 .03 -.04 -

14 Information underload .27** .01 -.21** -.04 -.08 .15** .05 .20** -.14** .28** -.13** -.39** -.23** -

15 Communication satisfaction -.45** -.03 .04 .04 .08 -.10** .02 -.14** .20** -.20** .03 .30** .19** -.46** -

16 Communication climate -.43** -.05 .03 .05 .07 -.08** .03 -.15** .23** -.20** .03 .37** .12** -.48** .61** -

17 Coworker social support -.28** -.02 -.08* .07 .07 -.08* .01 -.04 .16** -.07* -.06 .09** .06 -.20** .39** .29** -

18 Supervisor social support -.30** .02 -.04 .01 .01 -.04 .03 -.13** .12** -.13** -.01 .22** .07* -.30** .47** .38** .48** -

19 Job satisfaction -.52** -.05 .08* .05 .09 -.08* .03 -.09** .25** -.20** .12** .28** .08* -.35** .52** .46** .27** .35** -

20 Affective commitment -.34** -.12** .08* .04 .09 -.05 .08 .06 .19** -.06* .02 .22** .04 -.22** .40** .33** .28** .27** .44** -

21 Continuance commitment .15** .07* .46** .03 .10 -.06 -.16** -.06 -.05 -.15** .45** .01 .00 -.09** -.03 -.04 -.07* .00 .04 .12** -

22 Normative commitment -.02 -.10** .12** .05 .10 .03 -.02 .03 .00 -.01 .08* .07* -.05 -.05 .08* -.01 .03 .10** .09 .33** .31** -

23 Career commitment -.25** -.06 .06 .06 .05 -.02 .06 .13** .19** .00 .04 .05 -.01 -.08* .18** .12** .18** .14** .34** .38** .04 .20** -

24 Trust in management -.36** -.02 .00 .00 .02 -.05 .07* -.12** .14** -.16** .00 .34** .11** -.37** .61** .60** .33** .58** .47** .32** -.02 .07* .13**


Table 4

Hierarchical Regression to Predict Burnout (Dependent Variable – Burnout)

Predictors Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

ββββ t ββββ t ββββ t ββββ t

1 gender -.03 -.85 -.05 -1.40 -.05 -1.46 -.07 -2.52**

2 age -.06 -1.81 -.00 -.07 -.05 -1.41 -.13 -3.93***

3 marital status -.02 -.43 -.03 -.74 -.03 -.78 -.01 -.34

4 children -.06 -1.57 -.04 -1.07 -.01 -.40 -.03 -.86

5 life events .12 3.67** .05 1.63 .03 .93 .04 1.41

6 working hours-week -.06 -1.73 -.04 -1.39 -.03 -.93

7 workload .09 2.68** .06 1.87 .10 3.36***

8 autonomy -.21 -6.52*** -.12 -3.90*** -.05 -1.69

9 work-life barriers .25 7.1*** .22 6.64*** .20 6.65***

10 job insecurity .09 2.71** .09 3.10*** .06 2.05*

11 person-organization fit .20 6.45*** .08 2.69** .05 1.63

12 information overload -.00 -.06 -.01 -.522

13 information underload -.06 -1.58 -.07 -2.06*

14 communication satisfaction -.22 -5.84*** -.10 -2.56**

15 communication climate -.17 -4.58*** -.13 -3.68***

16 coworker social support -.09 -2.82** -.06 -2.03*

17 supervisor social support -.03 -.84 -.02 -.58

18 job satisfaction -.29 -8.87***

19 affective commitment -.09 2.67**

20 continuance commitment .23 7.37***

21 normative commitment -.01 -.21

22 career commitment -.09 3.37***

23 trust in management .04 .98

Adjusted R2 .02*** .21*** .33*** .45***

Adjusted � R2 .02 .19 .12 .12

F 4.90 36.84 27.65 32.81

df 5, 904 6, 898 6, 892 6, 886

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

organizational communication and burnout symptoms

Documents